Welcome

Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

the continuous news coverage of one unstable women is flabbergasting. sometimes the media is as bad at prioritizing what is important more than politicians. this event might have been worthy of a mention but it all ended in minutes yet the coverage went on for hours.1000 more important issues to bring to our attention. they constantly report on others lack of priorities but don't seem to realize that they do the same thing.ah... networks, ratings, $$.rant over.

the continuous news coverage of one unstable women is flabbergasting. sometimes the media is as bad at prioritizing what is important more than politicians. this event might have been worthy of a mention but it all ended in minutes yet the coverage went on for hours.1000 more important issues to bring to our attention. they constantly report on others lack of priorities but don't seem to realize that they do the same thing.ah... networks, ratings, $$.rant over.

Mitch , you are going to offend our junior reporter Tedscooplou if you keep knocking the news

Mitch, I get what you're saying. Having said that, I do think this was newsworthy, especially given the political climate. When someone has tried to climb the White House fence, that is usually something that gets a small mention on the news.

But, attempting to breach barricades and leading agents on a chase to the Capital is something that deserves more coverage, when she was shot and killed with her baby next to her. And, this woman putting her baby at risk makes me wonder what caused her to snap. I mean, when Michael Jackson died, all the networks were on with special reports. The Today Show led their broadcast today with the news of the Jackson/AEG verdict. Now, that is ridiculous.

But, I get what you're saying. The cable news channels just go on and on, repeating the same things. They stretch it out to get the most out of it. But, they would just be airing Crossfire and other yelling match shows. Yes, Crossfire is back. The networks came on with special reports, but were off the air within 30 minutes. The network evening newscasts led with it, but then went on to cover other stories.

Mitch, I get what you're saying. Having said that, I do think this was newsworthy, especially given the political climate. When someone has tried to climb the White House fence, that is usually something that gets a small mention on the news.

But, attempting to breach barricades and leading agents on a chase to the Capital is something that deserves more coverage, when she was shot and killed with her baby next to her. And, this woman putting her baby at risk makes me wonder what caused her to snap. I mean, when Michael Jackson died, all the networks were on with special reports. The Today Show led their broadcast today with the news of the Jackson/AEG verdict. Now, that is ridiculous.

But, I get what you're saying. The cable news channels just go on and on, repeating the same things. They stretch it out to get the most out of it. But, they would just be airing Crossfire and other yelling match shows. Yes, Crossfire is back. The networks came on with special reports, but were off the air within 30 minutes. The network evening newscasts led with it, but then went on to cover other stories.

I agree in was newsworthy, just not THAT newsworthy. Those TV talking heads need to get back to basics. It happens every day but I just chose yesterday to get pissy about it. I feel better now.

These days, there's plenty of news available about everything and anything, big or small deal. Its not like you can't learn about big events, if the mainstream coverage of the day is something seemingly small, or trivial...

Is it true most americans are watching just FOX News? Well that's a travesty bigger than cnn losing its mojo.... I only see the clips on Daily Show. What he showed from FOX News the last few days made my brain melt.

« Last Edit: October 04, 2013, 07:03:22 PM by mecch »

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

These days, there's plenty of news available about everything and anything, big or small deal. Its not like you can't learn about big events, if the mainstream coverage of the day is something seemingly small, or trivial...

and Before Miss Pee pounces... I primarily watch/listen to CNBC during the day, but I do switch back and forth between Fox and CNN early in the morning or late at night. You really have to do that to get an Idea of what is REALLY going on, the truth is somewhere in between those 2.

MSNBC is obviously left. Having said that, I do think they do factual reports on the issues they do choose to cover. They will pounce on Republicans, but hey, it's so easy. But, they don't just make up stuff like FOX. I don't care for Ed Shultz. Chris can be annoying how he interrupts. Rachel is good. And, during the day, out and proud news anchor, Thomas Roberts is good, as well as Tamron Hall.

Compare their morning shows. Many may not care for Morning Joe, but they do try to have honest debates. FOX and Friends is worse than Hannity.

What I see on Daily Show of Fox News is always baldfaced lies and spin.Why someone would think the truth lies between Fox and CNN is beyond me...More like between CNN and MSNBC. I don't think Rachel Maddow makes things up whole hog....

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

What I see on Daily Show of Fox News is always baldfaced lies and spin.Why someone would think the truth lies between Fox and CNN is beyond me...More like between CNN and MSNBC. I don't think Rachel Maddow makes things up whole hog....

Way off topic here..... Is it bald-faced lies or bold-face lies? I always say bold-faced. However, my late Harvard uncle would always argue it is bald-faced. I noticed Miss P used bold-faced recently, and we know she is smarts. Perhaps I should have put this in the I'm Bored thread.

About CNN, I would love to ask Jon Stewart what he'd have them change. It is obvious that he thinks they have lost a lot of their credibility and stature. He hated Crossfire and they canceled it-- although they have brought it back from the dead. He makes fun of how they were using "holograms" to interview people. People prefer news channels that lean toward their political views. CNN is stuck trying to play it unbiased, which can be boring for many. And, being objective doesn't mean you have to do tit for tat-- "Obama says this and Boener says that. You decide who is telling the truth."

Sort of related, if you want a real flavour of America, trying reading the comments in the New York Times and then go to Fox, especially Todd Starnes columns. The difference is beyond stark and I had no idea of the hatred held by so many Republicans. The language and sentiments are obscene and there is little, if any, actual dialogue and facts are strictly forbidden.

Thank you Congress, for allowing American education to be stripped to the bones. Now I KNOW how these folks get elected.

Peoples beef with CNN is the same one raised in this thread. Saying too many trivial and speculative things to fill a 24 hour news channel. There is an "event" so you go to the "event", go live, and end up saying anything and a lot of it is stupid.

While you might have rather done some reporting about something real and significant. Somewhere locally, nationally, or internationally. But reporting is expensive and takes time...

___

Obviously people prefer news that reflects their place on the political spectrum. The mistake these days is that Fox News isn't a very good news source, its intent seems to be propaganda for the Right. Its 24-hour spin, propaganda and lies. Well thats the impression I get.

It's not IRONIC that we see in politics the same thing we see in the media landscape. A majority of people willing to live by facts and negotiation and compromise, for the common good, and smaller band of zealots who manage to have enough power to be muck things up.

When i lived in NY I read the WSJ and the NYT every day and the WSJ wasn't a pile of lies and there were some things I really liked about it.

Maybe society deserves a paradigm shift for television news... Clearly the US could use a "responsible" right media outlet, just as it could use a responsible, fact based Republican party...

CNN can still be OK. BBC is good but they don't produce podcasts for the international market. Al Jazeera has done good investigative reports for several years now and they are available as podcasts.

I watch most of my American news as podcasts so I watch the NBC nightly news (maybe a few times a week, and also if Im interested in the lead story or not) and Rachel Maddow, and CNN has a good daily podcast of 3-4 short news items called StudentNews. I'll watch nightly news from Paris once or twice a week, same for French language news in Switzerland. I don't speak German and I'd guess they have an interesting news culture with some serious products, so its a pity for me.

News should NOT have a political slant. News should be the reporting of facts. Some may stray much farther from that standard than others -- but it seems that they pretty much all do stray now. The news shows are more concerned with generating revenue. You do that by delivering eyes and one way to do that is have "Breaking News" (notice how breaking news now remains "breaking" for hours, if not days.....).

The blending of vapid talking heads into the "news" has been the downfall. I don't really care what a news anchor "thinks" about a story. If I wanted that sort of entertainment, I'd put on a talk show. (I know I'm going to slammed for this, but the only difference between a Palin and a Maddow is how far they are willing to bend the facts to fit their worldview.)

Barbara please. Surely an astute reader of history would be aware of the political slant of The Pennsylvania Chronicle in 1770. Unless, of course, you consider yourself more intelligent than Benniebenben Franklin.

I learned in my studies and my career there is really not much hope of any representation of facts to be neutral. There is always bias in what is selected, how it is edited, and what is said by the news presenter..

But in general, I agree. At least we want facts, not fabrications.

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

I think the current dilemma has something to do with this frequent leftist critique. What we have now is "flat Earth and round Earth" presented as if its two reasonable counterpoints.... (Round Earth is fact. Flat Earth is not.)

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

I learned in my studies and my career there is really not much hope of any representation of facts to be neutral. There is always bias in what is selected, how it is edited, and what is said by the news presenter..

I think one of the smartest people in news today is Chris Hayes. Nerdy cute, a great sense of humor, and usually has both points of view presented. Sure he is a lefty but he seems to have more integrity than most.He gets into the nitty-gritty details of a topic by using a more fact based analysis.Did I say he is cute?

I think one of the smartest people in news today is Chris Hayes. Nerdy cute, a great sense of humor, and usually has both points of view presented. Sure he is a lefty but he seems to have more integrity than most.He gets into the nitty-gritty details of a topic by using a more fact based analysis.Did I say he is cute?

I think he is the male Maddow. I thought for a year he was family, but learned he was a breeder. Maddow has a way of explaining issues, so even someone with trouble following things could follow it. She doesn't do the shout-downs. It really feels like you're in a university class, but one more interesting. Palin and Maddow?? Death panels vs what? As I said, MSNBC obviously has a point of view. But, they use facts. They want progressive ideals to succeed-- helping the poor, middle class, environment, etc. I liked Olbermann, but his style got too annoying. I think his style had a place, when the media was given Bush a free pass after 9/11 and leading up to Iraq, and after.

FOX wants mega-wealthy folks to have more money, while pushing conspiracy theories about the IRS, Benghazi, and how Obama's patriotism is still questionable. FOX has been known to put Democrat by the names of republicans in a scandal. They did that with Mark Foley, the gay repub trying to molest pages. I think they thought their viewers wouldn't know who he was and would just assume a gay Congressmen was a dem.

exactly. Mike, enough of playing "sitting on the fence". I often don't know where you stand by your statements. This forum is not the corporate world that you live in. It's just us. Palin, Maddow? I get your point but I wish you tell us what you really believe.

exactly. Mike, enough of playing "sitting on the fence". I often don't know where you stand by your statements. This forum is not the corporate world that you live in. It's just us. Palin, Maddow? I get your point but I wish you tell us what you really believe.

ps- you know I love you dear.

What? Someone can not be between Palin and Maddow? Really??? The us or them, with no crossing is why we are where we are today. I am not sitting on a fence, I am just being me, an independent.

For the record, I am far closer to Maddow than Palin, but I can not stand Maddow's show. She may not make up facts like Palin, but she picks those that fit and ignores the others. Of course, I do not really watch any talking heads with any regularity. I would rather listen to Judge Judy.

So, if you want to know what I believe - ask. I am not shy and thought I've been clear.

(I know I'm going to slammed for this, but the only difference between a Palin and a Maddow is how far they are willing to bend the facts to fit their worldview.)

M

I guess I see far more differences between the two. A hypocritical hate mongering selfish lying stardom seeking idiot politician vs. a liberal minded intelligent reporter who presents things in a factual manor.

"In between"? I'm just not understanding this whole way of thinking as it was presented. I have my doubts Palin is capable of having a world view but if she somehow actually has one her world view is overshadowed by who she is as a person. It's not left vs. right, it's right vs. wrong. I'm all for listening to different sides when logic and truth are involved but Palin has neither. You may not like Maddow's style but their differences go far beyond fact bending.

I respect your independent political beliefs but putting those two on the same playing field in your statement just through me for a loop. My apologies for replying inappropriately earlier.

As far as Rachael goes, yes she presents topics with a strong liberal focus but so do most others no matter which political party they favor. I honestly think her reporting is based on facts.

I too wish logic and compromise were able to happen but we seem to be in a cycle of extreme polarizationdue in most part IMO to the mindset of the tea party. Sometimes you just have to put the blame where it belongs. (and vote them out of office if that's even possible these days)

I respect your independent political beliefs but putting those two on the same playing field in your statement just through me for a loop. My apologies for replying inappropriately earlier.

Well, to be honest, I used Palin to get folks attention -- the names were simply representative of the far right and far left. Believe me, I put Palin in the same category as Bachman -- that being batshit crazy.My point was that it doesn't matter what polar end you are on -- left or right -- the bias exists and blinds you to seeing anything outside of your beliefs (a gross overgeneralization, but directionally pretty on point, I think).I am definitely left of center, but I am in the minority on these forums, where folks are far more to the left than I, so I may, at times, "over-steer" in my posts.

BTW -- I do believe that this current shutdown is absolutely a one-sided affair. The Tea Party has the ball-less John Boehner doing their bidding for fear of losing is position. That is beyond the pale, in my mind. If the Continuing Resolution was brought to a vote in the House, I believe the Dems and the moderate Repubs would get the government open again. The Debt Ceiling crisis (if it happens) will also be all on the Repubs -- I do not think we should negotiate the next budget, while holding the current expenses hostage. The debt ceiling needs to rise due to Congress' earlier spending authorizations, not because of the next budget.Once we get past these two things, I think we will see the problem of heel digging from both sides again and , yet again, Congress will not pass a budget.

So -- no need to apologize dear. I try not to take politics personally with friends. Reasonable people can disagree and still be reasonable.

Well, to be honest, I used Palin to get folks attention -- the names were simply representative of the far right and far left. Believe me, I put Palin in the same category as Bachman -- that being batshit crazy.My point was that it doesn't matter what polar end you are on -- left or right -- the bias exists and blinds you to seeing anything outside of your beliefs (a gross overgeneralization, but directionally pretty on point, I think).I am definitely left of center, but I am in the minority on these forums, where folks are far more to the left than I, so I may, at times, "over-steer" in my posts.

BTW -- I do believe that this current shutdown is absolutely a one-sided affair. The Tea Party has the ball-less John Boehner doing their bidding for fear of losing is position. That is beyond the pale, in my mind. If the Continuing Resolution was brought to a vote in the House, I believe the Dems and the moderate Repubs would get the government open again. The Debt Ceiling crisis (if it happens) will also be all on the Repubs -- I do not think we should negotiate the next budget, while holding the current expenses hostage. The debt ceiling needs to rise due to Congress' earlier spending authorizations, not because of the next budget.Once we get past these two things, I think we will see the problem of heel digging from both sides again and , yet again, Congress will not pass a budget.

So -- no need to apologize dear. I try not to take politics personally with friends. Reasonable people can disagree and still be reasonable.

Hugs,Mike

Thanks Mike.

While you do tend to "over-steer" at times, I tend to "over-react". lol.

It's nice to hear your views especially when you come down on one side or the other. I know being independent doesn't mean you side equally on all issues but we all have to call a spade a spade at times.I especially liked when you called out Boehner as ball-less and Bachman as batshit crazy. Plenty more spades in the tool shed.

I'd ask you who compares on the other side of the aisle but I'm afraid. Very afraid. A topic for another day, or not.

I read there are 195 Dems and 21 or 23 moderate repubs to get a clean CR passed and stop this shutdown today. But, Boner is looking out for himself. He doesn't want to lose his position. He has to go along with the tea-baggers, even though he wished they were gone.

A FOX anchor takes a story from a parody news site that Obama is going to personally pay to keep the Muslim Museum open. She goes on to say how the RNC is paying to keep the WW2 memorial open, to say repubs are true patriots and Obama really is the Islamic sleeper cell.

While MSNBC does have a big slant toward progressive issues, they would not have fallen for this or ran with it. FOX didn't even bother to fact check it, because their fact checking team is a rat in Sean Hannities dressing room. Even if they make a correction, the damage is done. But, I'm sure most their viewers wouldn't believe the correction anyway.

A FOX anchor takes a story from a parody news site that Obama is going to personally pay to keep the Muslim Museum open. She goes on to say how the RNC is paying to keep the WW2 memorial open, to say repubs are true patriots and Obama really is the Islamic sleeper cell.

While MSNBC does have a big slant toward progressive issues, they would not have fallen for this or ran with it. FOX didn't even bother to fact check it, because their fact checking team is a rat in Sean Hannities dressing room. Even if they make a correction, the damage is done. But, I'm sure most their viewers wouldn't believe the correction anyway.

A FOX anchor takes a story from a parody news site that Obama is going to personally pay to keep the Muslim Museum open. She goes on to say how the RNC is paying to keep the WW2 memorial open, to say repubs are true patriots and Obama really is the Islamic sleeper cell.

While MSNBC does have a big slant toward progressive issues, they would not have fallen for this or ran with it. FOX didn't even bother to fact check it, because their fact checking team is a rat in Sean Hannities dressing room. Even if they make a correction, the damage is done. But, I'm sure most their viewers wouldn't believe the correction anyway.

Times have changed in politics and media. They both react to one another and it is a reflection of life in America today.

Would it be nice to have the news media be more unbiased? Would it be nice if politicians could actually listen to each other? Are we more polarized today as a society? Yes, yes, yes.

So what has happened in recent years? A bunch of batshit Teaparty Republicans have taken a strong foothold in the congress in large part due to Gerrymandering.They IMHO are incapable of logic or compassion. The trend in media today reflects this. I wish I could have more hope that reasonable minds could come together but at this point in our countries history I do not. How does one negotiate with those that think along the lines of Bachman, Cruz, etc.? Should they?? Should politicians have negotiated with McCarthy? Helms? Should the media have remained neutral?